Another visitation ?

[mainman]

Originally posted by crabcake
If the judge gave her a year to get treatment, and it's only 3 months into that time period, that's a little unreasonable, don't ya think? Maybe she can't get a bed in a center yet b/c of overcrowding. :shrug: If she already told a judge she was enrolled in treatment, but she's really not, that's a different story.

There are lots of "what if's" here that we don't know that keep us from really being able to answer.

There are beds...

 

[unixpirate]

First your an idgit for even thinking about letter her
have the child for any length of time. Where and why do you think this all started in the first place??!?!!??

You need to stop thinking about yourself, your ex, whatever and think about the child. If you have to bite the bullet for 10 yrs and not go out for the sake of your childs mental health, support or what ever, then so be it!

Get a grip and stop your whining. That's why they have laws and you have a lawyer. Jeeeeeeeeeeeeez!

 

[Tina2001aniT]

Originally posted by Kain99
An Exparte is a Restraining Order. This is officially the first case I have ever heard of where a spouse is allowed to supervise visitation. normally the Court appoints a County employee from CPS.

I live in Calvert County and have been through the "supervised visitation" thing, it is a joke.....the court will not appoint an employee or official to "supervise" The parents have to agree on someone to supervise, therefore someone to sit with this a$$hole all day while he "visits" his kid.........I only know bacause I have been there and the judge told me straight up there are no court appointed officials for supervised visitation......

 

[unixpirate]

I can't imagine sitting there with my ex while its there time with the children?

WTF!

 

[Tina2001aniT]

Originally posted by unixpirate
I can't imagine sitting there with my ex while its there time with the children?

WTF!

It would drive me crazy as well.....luckily my mother being the wonderful person that she is volunteered to do it the first time...then the father had to arrange through some organization in St. Mary's County to have supervised visitation there (not a gavernment organization) and he had to pay for it....kinda like day care...he never signed up so no visitation for him....

 

[unixpirate]

It would drive me crazy as well.

Well luckily I haven't and hope to never go through what the original guy from this thread is going through.
I love my children and would do anything in the world for them.

Anyway, enough patting myself on the back.. LOL!

But I can't see where the state or local judges can say, you as a spouse can be a supervisor for your spouse to visit when
you are where you are today for a reason..

YOU DON'T GET ALONG for some reason or another and they expect you to sit around and wait while he or she visits?

 

[crabcake]

I hope your kids hate you when they grow up for being so damn selfish and immature, and not putting aside your petty differences for their sake.

You banged the person and created life; YOU should have to sit with 'em; not some court appointed babysitter. Quitcherbiatchin and be a grown-up and a parent instead of a crybaby.

 

[unixpirate]

ou banged the person and created life

 

[mainman]

Originally posted by crabcake
I hope your kids hate you when they grow up for being so damn selfish and immature, and not putting aside your petty differences for their sake.

Who are you talking too in this tread? Is crack addiction a petty difference?

 

[crabcake]

Originally posted by mainman
Who are you talking too in this tread? Is crack addiction a petty difference?

I'm talking to the twits who are biatching about having to sit present while their ex visits with THEIR child.

I'm not condoning drug abuse; but I wouldn't condone immaturity and childishness either when it comes to being a parent. And that's exactly how some of the posts here sound. Parenthood isn't for wimps. If you can't hack it and the challenges that come along with it, stop reproducing with freaks! :shrug:

 

[unixpirate]

Who are you talking too in this tread

Is that "tread" off a tire? Or thread of this conversation?

She is talking about him being selfish by saying he hadn't been out in about a year.

 

[Tina2001aniT]

Originally posted by mainman
Who are you talking too in this tread? Is crack addiction a petty difference?

How about a 30 year old man that sleeps with 13 year olds, and was known to occosianally hit the baby mama---and mama fears for the baby's safety, and one who tells a four year old she is stupid among other things??

petty differences?? maybe to some, but to me it is reason enough to say that visitation should AT LEAST be supervised if not suspended....

 

[mainman]

Re: Who are you talking too in this tread

Originally posted by unixpirate
Is that "tread" off a tire? Or thread of this conversation?

How about don't tread on me? You forgot that one...

 

[mainman]

Originally posted by Tina2001aniT
How about a 30 year old man that sleeps with 13 year olds, and was known to occosianally hit the baby mama---and mama fears for the baby's safety, and one who tells a four year old she is stupid among other things??

petty differences?? maybe to some, but to me it is reason enough to say that visitation should AT LEAST be supervised if not suspended....

You are preaching to the choir...

 

[unixpirate]

How about don't tread on me? You forgot that one...

 

[Tina2001aniT]

The #1 reason for ex-spouses not supervising visits.....

Just say....for arguments sake....that something happened during a "supervised" visit--there is a reason they are supervised- and there needs to be action taken.......You go to court and it is your word against your ex-spouses......Hence the reason for a neutral third party superviser

 

[crabcake]

Originally posted by Tina2001aniT
How about a 30 year old man that sleeps with 13 year olds, and was known to occosianally hit the baby mama---and mama fears for the baby's safety, and one who tells a four year old she is stupid among other things??

petty differences?? maybe to some, but to me it is reason enough to say that visitation should AT LEAST be supervised if not suspended....

I'm not saying the person's not a freak or that his visits (if any) should be unsupervised; but you slept with that freak and had a child by him. If a court decides that he SHOULD get to visit with his child, you shouldn't sit here and biatch and whine about how 'icky' it is to have to be in the same room with him. :shrug:

 

[crabcake]

Re: The #1 reason for ex-spouses not supervising visits.....

Originally posted by Tina2001aniT
Just say....for arguments sake....that something happened during a "supervised" visit--there is a reason they are supervised- and there needs to be action taken.......You go to court and it is your word against your ex-spouses......Hence the reason for a neutral third party superviser

The power of the voting ballot can be an amazing thing.

 

[unixpirate]

whine about how 'icky' it is to have to be in the same room with him

crabby.. crabby.. crabby..
Do you hear yourself? Have you ever been in a situation like this guy is in?

 

[Tina2001aniT]

Originally posted by crabcake
I'm not saying the person's not a freak or that his visits (if any) should be unsupervised; but you slept with that freak and had a child by him. If a court decides that he SHOULD get to visit with his child, you shouldn't sit here and biatch and whine about how 'icky' it is to have to be in the same room with him. :shrug:

I must say that I agree that you should not have to whine about it being "icky" but for reasons previously stated I do not believe it is a good idea.......but on the other hand...If you leave your spouse because you want better for your child...should you really be subject to that every week or every other week??